skip to main content
10.1145/2541928.2541937acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesdsmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

model[NL]generation: natural language model extraction

Published:27 October 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we describe a novel approach of extracting models from natural language text sources. This requires linguistic analysis as well as techniques for interpreting and using the analysis results. Our linguistic analysis engine provides feature analysis for a rule-based model element detection. Furthermore, the presented approach enables users to generate domain- and application-specific model element detection rules based on natural language sample sentences. Detection rules also have to be connected to instantiation rules for the respective type of model element. This is done through a highly system-supported mapping step where users are able to choose elements from arbitrary meta models and to connect their properties with functions over natural language sentence parts. As both, the definition and application of detection rules is always a sensitive balancing act between precision and recall, these steps are highly interactive. That is why our current prototype also supports detection rule adaption and iterative rule set completion -- always to the level of current need.

References

  1. Baader, F. and Küsters, R. 1998. Computing the least common subsumer and the most specific concept in the presence of cyclic ALN-concept descriptions. In KI-98: Advances in Artificial Intelligence, O. Herzog and A. Günter, Eds. LNCS. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 129--140. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Borman, L. 1985. Human factors in computing systems. CHI '85 conference proceedings April 14-18 San Francisco. CHI Conference, New York, NY. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Friedrich, F., Mendling, J., and Puhlmann, F. 2011. Process Model Generation from Natural Language Text. In Advanced Information Systems Engineering, Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 482--496. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Ghose, A., Koliadis, G., and Chueng, A. Process Discovery from Model and Text Artefacts. In 2007 IEEE Congress on Services (Services 2007), 167--174.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Hendrix, G. G. 1982. Natural-language interface. Comput. Linguist. 8, 2, 56--61. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Jablonski, S., Volz, B., and Dornstauder, S. A Meta Modeling Framework for Domain Specific Process Management. In 2008 32nd Annual IEEE International COMPSAC, 1011--1016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Jurafsky, D. and Martin, J. H. 2009. Speech and language processing. An introduction to natural language processing, computational linguistics, and speech recognition. Prentice-Hall-series in artificial intelligence. Pearson Education International Prentice Hall Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. L. Ratinov and D. Roth. 2009. Design Challenges and Misconceptions in Named Entity Recognition. In CoNLL. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Marneffe, M.-C. de and Manning, C. D. 2008. The Stanford typed dependencies representation. In Coling 2008: Proceedings of the workshop on Cross-Framework and Cross-Domain Parser Evaluation. CrossParser '08. ACL, Stroudsburg, PA, USA, 1--8. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Marta Fernandez and Caroline Eastman. 1990. Basic Taxonomic Structures and Levels of Abstraction. Advances in Classification Research Online 1, 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Mohri, M., Rostamizadeh, A., and Talwalkar, A. 2012. Foundations of machine learning. Adaptive computation and machine learning. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Pollard, C. and Sag, I. A. 1994. Head-driven phrase structure grammar. Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Pooley, L. D. Object-Oriented Analysis Using Natural Language Processing. CiteSeerX, DOI=10.1.1.60.1836.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Sinha, A., Paradkar, A., Kumanan, P., and Boguraev, B. A linguistic analysis engine for natural language use case description and its application to dependability analysis in industrial use cases. In Networks (DSN), 327--336.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. model[NL]generation: natural language model extraction

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          DSM '13: Proceedings of the 2013 ACM workshop on Domain-specific modeling
          October 2013
          70 pages
          ISBN:9781450326001
          DOI:10.1145/2541928

          Copyright © 2013 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 27 October 2013

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          DSM '13 Paper Acceptance Rate11of17submissions,65%Overall Acceptance Rate31of50submissions,62%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader